https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457719 A statement recorded under section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, supported by seized documents and corroborative confirmation from named persons, was treated as sufficient material to sustain the alleged contraventions under section 9(1)(b) and section 9(1)(d); the claim of duress was rejected and the finding of contravention was maintained. On penalty, the tribunal applied proportionality and found the original amount excessive in the circumstances, reducing it substantially and directing adjustment of the confiscated amount against the penalty. en-us Tue, 06 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Sep 2024 16:42:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457719 A statement recorded under section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, supported by seized documents and corroborative confirmation from named persons, was treated as sufficient material to sustain the alleged contraventions under section 9(1)(b) and section 9(1)(d); the claim of duress was rejected and the finding of contravention was maintained. On penalty, the tribunal applied proportionality and found the original amount excessive in the circumstances, reducing it substantially and directing adjustment of the confiscated amount against the penalty. Case-Laws FEMA Tue, 06 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457719